Re: Is it possible add 'Guix package manager without "make install"' to guix doc?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès writes:

[...]

>> I confess that, being biased as I am ;-), I don’t fully understand the
>> rationale: after all, you’re already installing /gnu and
>> /usr/local/var/guix, so why is it so important to not install two more
>> files in /usr/local/bin?
>>
>> But really, it’s just me being ignorant about the use case, so I’m happy
>> to read what people think/want.
>
> Well, for me it's two reasons:
>  - I've had pain with things being dumped to /usr/local/ and then
>    trouble removing the whole thing before, not to mention forgetting
>    that they're there.  I try to avoid installing to my system unless
>    using a package manager (and now, guix counts as one of those ;))

OK.

>  - I also wanted to hack on guix and guix packages... I guess, maybe
>    it's possible to do with a make install?  But given that I'm
>    interactively hacking on the project, wouldn't I want to not have to
>    do a "make install" every time and instead use whatever's in git?

Right, I wouldn’t want to run “make install” every time a new package is
added.  ;-)

>    Similarly, I've wondered, how do GuixSD users hack on Guix, if Guix
>    is already installed system-wide?  Genuine question!

I definitely use ./pre-inst-env while hacking, plus Geiser with the
appropriate ‘geiser-guile-load-path’.

I try to force myself to distinguish between hacking the thing and using
it.  So I put my “end-user” hat on (don’t laugh!) and run ‘guix pull’
and ‘guix’ (without ./pre-inst-env) when I want to fiddle with my
profile or unrelated development environments.

So my ~/.config/guix/latest is usually slightly behind Git, but that’s
not necessarily a bad thing (sort-of like ‘testing’ vs. ‘unstable’ ;-)).

Ludo’.